"Anarcho"-fascism

I'm a bit worried to ask, but what are your views on patriotism?

As for the rest, just goes to show you can slap the 'anarcho' prefix on the front of any old unrelated shite to make it seem edgy. Why is this any different from all the other shit 'anarcho-whatever' politics around that people have to disassociate themselves from?

Indeed.

I read stormfront every once in a while to see what the local fascists are up to. Last time I checked, there was a guy who had a picture of Bakunin in his profile pic, and used a Bakunin quote to back up his rather strange views. He seemed to have some sort of degenerated Proudhonian separatist/racist federalist politics.

Very fuckered in my casual opinion.

Wow, fascism seems to be getting strange, even for fascism.

yeah i just had a look on that storm front site. the section that they have for people wanting to argue with them is ridiculous. how stupid ca people be? and i ain't just referencing to their politics either.

Richard Hunt
(even in his Green Anarchist days)
was always a cunt.

People need to tread carefully here since both Proudhon and Bakunin were known anti-semites. In addition, Proudhon was a French patriot (who wanted, for instance, the Channel Islands "returned" to France) while Bakunin flirted with panslavism. So, it can't be denied that fascists and patriots can find stuff from them to back up their approach.
In a postcript to his pamphlet Marx théoricien de l'anarchisme Maximilien Rubel wrote of Bakunin:

To back this up Rubel quotes a passage from the Bakunin Archives edited by Arthur Lehning about the link-up between Marx and the Rothschilds:

I suppose this is the sort of material the "anarcho"-fascists are able to rely on.
PS I though Richard Hunt died a couple of years ago.

I know that Bakunin denounced his nationalist tendencies once he suscribed to anarchism, so was he actually an anti-semite throughout all of his anarchist thought?

Bakunin did kick it with Wagner in '48..

When did he become an anarchist? Probably towards the end of the 1860s. I imagine that did involve him abandoning his earlier flirting with panslavism (but I'm not sure, perhaps somebody else can throw some light on this). But his anti-semitism continued after he became an anarchist and was (still being)expressed at the time his dispute with Marx in the International Working Men's Association in the early 1870s. As he died in 1876 (aged 62) this was not a youthful position he later abandoned.
Anyway, here's what wikipedia says about his anti-semitism:

]

In 1873, Bakunin saw the Germans as "state-worhippers and bureaucrats by nature." By contrast, he described the Slavs as "unpolitical, i.e non-statist."

Capricorn, do you read French or is that Rubel "postscript" you mention available in English?

Yes, I was quoting and translating from a 1983 reprint, to which Rubel added a postcript, of his original 1973 article. I don't think the 12-page postcript has been translated into English. But the wikipedia contributor is quoting from the same work by Bakunin about the Jews as a group being leeches and parasites.

Before you folks dismiss national-anarchism as a crypto-fascist conspiracy, you might want to at least give some of its ideas a fair hearing.

http://www.attackthesystem/com/nationalanarchism.html

Fascism is a specific type of system where state and capital are welded together in a corporatist economy, with the subordination of labor, and militaristic belligerence. That has nothing to do with national-anarchism, the idea of decentralized communities oriented towards the particular.

admin: link broken

Ban!

Hello gents,

As a National Anarchists I should warn you that everything you know about anarchism is wrong. I am, as an anarchist, allowed the dignity as a human being to right to self-determination of who I am and what my identity is while I am on this planet. As such I have found a political tendency that specifies that I am allowed to define my tribal or national identity however I see fit. This outlook is commonly referred to as National Anarchy. I think that term is not always accurate and I tend to call it Tribal Anarchy. The tribe I am interested in looks like me, natively speaks my language, and shares my religious values. Thats not to say that other tribes are less valuable, just not my primary interest in life. I seek to create autonomous communities of my tribe to resist statist oppression and live in the world according to the values of organic life. Economically I am a syndicalist and advocate non-globalist forms of self-managed worker collectives. I'm not interested in persecuting other tribes but I am more than willing to defend my own from outsiders aggression. You can find out more about the network of National Anarchists I am involved in at www.bayareana/tionalanarchists.com As I expect to be banned by your moderators, there is a forum that you can choose to discuss these ideas further in that website.

For revolution,
RexRegex

admin: link broken

Ban?

Why are you so afraid of ideas?

Fuck...they're based in the bay area...why do we always attract all the nut cases ? This has got to be a fucking joke...please tell me its a joke guys....guys...

oh...yea...I say ban em'

My sisters were killed by one when I was young.

BAN!

Your sisters were killed by ideas? How so?

Premeditated. Very brutal stuff.

Well, okay, sorry if such a terrible thing happened. How does that fit in with the topic of this thread?

Fucking hell.

Ban and delete his fucking propaganda.

Workers have no country. I'm pretty sure that applies to tribes too.

Which tribe would that be? What colour does your hair have to be to join? What do you think of the influx of people from Europe and Asia into the Bay Area? Do you think they should be sent home to their tribal homelands?
And what are your religious values?

The one that I claim to be my own.

Any.

Marvelous.

Perhaps, if only for short term educational value.

I do not discuss my religion on political forums.

bin this crap

I agree there is stuff written by Proudhon and Bakunin that would back up these guys' world view, I'd also say that some 'anarcho-primitivists' who are probably considered comrades by people like Chuck0 and raw come pretty close to this. Imo it highlights the potential for reaction in any form of anarchism which isn't specifically communist.

Oh and Nat Anarchists we are libertarian communists on here - you won't have much joy with us. We see class as the basis of liberation and any form of national, racial or 'tribal' identity simply as a means of dividing us from other workers and making us feel a common cause with our own oppressors.

Agreed but I dont know who Chuck() is.

Whats your flavor, Cambodian-style or Chinese?

Well we very much agree and take it one step further in that not only is class the basis of liberation but that denying ethnic identity is the same as cultural genocide akin to capital without borders and the essential goal of the ruling class to complete the process of global wage slavery. Denying race is racist as any African-American professor in urban studies will tell you. Far from being just "libertarian" communists you sell the Frankfurt school of thought which is a threat to all people who value their heritage. As champion of everyones right to express their own culture I can tell you now that you're ideas are doomed as you confuse the ends of social liberation with it's scalar in space (local vs. global concerns) which is symbolic of the widespread alienation of modern life rather than it's cure. And besides, I am much more than a "worker," I'm a human being and heir to much greater legacy than my relationship to the means of production. Thats such a narrow 19th century manner of appealing to another person to be appalling, and quite simply, an inadequate means to find common cause with anybody.

Any form of attachment to nationalism is a pure, undiluted poison for the working class. I'm in total solidarity with magnifico's points on this.

This is not the same as denying the existence of ethnic identity - such things clearly exist. But they cannot form any kind of pole around which we can form a resistance to capitalism, without capitulating the bourgeoisie. Capitalism is built on these divisions ... the nation state is the highest form of socio-political organisation that capitalist society can generate. It is precisely the contradiction between the globalising tendencies of capitalism and its ability to go beyond nations that is the root of its spiral of war and imperialism. It is the task of the proletariat to destroy all these frontiers and the creation of a truly global community that is defined by its participants' humanity, not their ethnic, geographical or national origin.

This doesn't mean the destruction of all the aspects of previous cultures. Rather it means a synthesis of their best elements and the true humanisation of the whole of homo sapiens:

"In the reconstruction and transformation of a world ravaged by decades of capitalist decay, the proletariat will inevitably confront problems of national, racial, and cultural divisions within its own ranks and within humanity as a whole. All these divisions will have to be faced, and discussed freely and openly within the workers’ councils and the territorial councils through which the proletarian power will deal with the rest of the population. But the final liquidation of these divisions can only be achieved by the continuous revolutionizing of the social fabric, which will undermine the material basis of such divisions and render them obsolete. As it moves towards the human community, the proletariat will initiate the fusion of all existing cultures into a truly universal culture, a higher synthesis of every previous human cultural achievement into the new culture of communism. With the emergence of this universal culture, the ‘tribal’ phase of human prehistory ends, and the real history of humanity begins." - Nation or Class?